What Wikipedia Won't Tell You, NYT Pick Of The Week Options

[Newsfeed]

What Wikipedia Won't Tell You

New York Times
Washington • The digital tsunami that swept over the Capitol last month, forcing Congress to set aside legislation to combat the online piracy of American music, movies, books and other creative works, raised questions about how the democratic process …

[thekohser]

Watch for the WP biography of Cary Sherman to get sabotaged in the next few days.

[EricBarbour]

a) I found this edit most amusing:

(cur | prev) 13:51, 22 May 2011‎ Doctorow (talk | contribs)‎ (3,829 bytes) (Removed inflammatory description of Sherman's critics, replaced with neutral language (BoycottRIAA is not a site advocating for piracy, it's a site advocating for copyright reform)) (undo)

(FYI: "Doctorow" is Cory Doctorow, sci-fi writer and blogger, and famed free-culture advocate, who loves to bitch about the RIAA.)

b) You see all the edits by one "Gunheim"? All he does lately is edit articles about the RIAA's leaders, Sherman and Mitch Bainwol.....and mostly to make them more negative.

So, the article has already been "vandalized".

(BTW, he's being mentored by TonyTheTiger...)

And there you have it. A perfect example of Wikipedia's house bias. In action.

This post has been edited by EricBarbour: Wed 8th February 2012, 4:05am

[EricBarbour]

Oh BTW: did you know that Hilary Rosen, previous head of the RIAA, was editing her own BLP?
Plus the BLPs of Sherman and Bainwol?

[lilburne]

And did you know that dear little Cory was a bitching and a moaning last year that the Daily Mail had used his wife's photos without permission:
http://boingboing.net/2011/08/16/daily-mai...urned-down.html

seems that for Cory only other people's stuff should be free.

[Alison]

And did you know that dear little Cory was a bitching and a moaning last year that the Daily Mail had used his wife's photos without permission:
http://boingboing.net/2011/08/16/daily-mai...urned-down.html

seems that for Cory only other people's stuff should be free.

In fairness, it was the Daily Fail and they do this a lot. They already have a reputation for stomping others who infringe their copyright, so I'm seeing it as his calling them on their hypocrisy.

[lilburne]

And did you know that dear little Cory was a bitching and a moaning last year that the Daily Mail had used his wife's photos without permission:
http://boingboing.net/2011/08/16/daily-mai...urned-down.html

seems that for Cory only other people's stuff should be free.

In fairness, it was the Daily Fail and they do this a lot. They already have a reputation for stomping others who infringe their copyright, so I'm seeing it as his calling them on their hypocrisy.

What's fair got to do with it? Information needs to be free, so what if its the Daily Heil, and so what if they were refused a license in the first place? I don't recall Cory "The Hypocrite" ever saying that there ought to be some morality test applied to those that infringe copyrights.

[EricBarbour]

In fairness, it was the Daily Fail and they do this a lot.

These photo squabbles really annoy me--and they should annoy anyone. All of the parties come off
looking greedy and disgusting. The photographer, the publisher, even the legal system that enables it. If
a photog was really screwed by a publisher, and he went to an attorney to file a suit, the attorney would
(of course) demand a contingency fee, plus a very large percentage of any recoveries. And who
ultimately pays? The people who bought the publication, of course.

Internet copyright wars are still in their early days. There is constant, relentless pressure on Congress,
Parliament and all other lawmaking bodies to make copyright infringement a major felony, thus making
wide swaths of the Internet illegal. I suspect we will be seeing laws passed in the near future that will
make SOPA look like a moderate thing. And if they can do that with video and audio recordings and
photographs, you can expect to see sentences and even single words protected. It will become a crime
to use a word in normal conversation. Orwell via the back door, if you like.

[Rhindle]

Internet copyright wars are still in their early days. There is constant, relentless pressure on Congress,
Parliament and all other lawmaking bodies to make copyright infringement a major felony, thus making
wide swaths of the Internet illegal. I suspect we will be seeing laws passed in the near future that will
make SOPA look like a moderate thing. And if they can do that with video and audio recordings and
photographs, you can expect to see sentences and even single words protected. It will become a crime
to use a word in normal conversation. Orwell via the back door, if you like.

Well, if Monsanto can copyright food, someone will eventually copyright any words besides just mottos and catchphrases.

[Abd]

Well, if Monsanto can copyright food, someone will eventually copyright any words besides just mottos and catchphrases.

I'm flomaxed©.

[Michaeldsuarez]

Watch for the WP biography of Cary Sherman to get sabotaged in the next few days.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...&action=history

The article is active again. Speaking of "sabotage", why is "Cusop Dingle" interested in having the article deleted?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cary_Sherman#Notability

[thekohser]

Watch for the WP biography of Cary Sherman to get sabotaged in the next few days.

I nailed that one.

[EricBarbour]

I nailed that one.

Only because we brought it up on WR......when will those Wikidiots admit it, WR has a lot of political power over Wikipedia?

Cusop is a sock account, and one of the resident squabblers from the NPOV Noticeboard, a place that few people ever read or
otherwise deal with. A constant battleground between deletionists and inclusionists, all happily together
generating megabytes of useless unreadable squabbling. All Hail Wikipedia.